Texas House Bill HB2372

Texas 2017 - 85th Regular

Caption

Relating to the premium surcharge certain automobile insurers are required to assess against an insured convicted of certain offenses.

Impact

The bill is expected to have a direct impact on the Insurance Code by amending the provisions related to the premium surcharges applied to drivers convicted of DWI or similar offenses. By regulating the duration of such surcharges to a maximum of three years, the bill aims to provide some level of financial relief to convicted individuals once the surcharge period concludes. This change may encourage responsible driving behaviors but could also raise discussions regarding the fairness of penalizing drivers through insurance premiums based on their past convictions.

Summary

House Bill 2372 aims to modify the existing regulations regarding premium surcharges that automobile insurers must impose on individuals who have been convicted of certain offenses, particularly those related to operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated (DWI). The bill states that insurers are required to assess a premium surcharge for no more than three years following such convictions. The key objective of this legislation is to standardize the punishment and increase accountability for drivers who have committed serious offenses while operating vehicles.

Sentiment

Overall, the sentiment around HB2372 appears to be largely supportive among pro-reform advocates who believe that standardized penalties are crucial for fostering accountability among drivers. However, there are concerns from insurance companies about revenue loss from surcharges, and from certain advocacy groups who question whether the reduced surcharge period effectively serves as a deterrent for drivers who engage in reckless behavior. This division highlights differing priorities around public safety versus the economic implications for the insurance industry.

Contention

One notable point of contention associated with HB2372 revolves around the balance between regulatory authority and individual accountability. Supporters argue that the bill appropriately aligns insurance penalties with the severity of offenses, thereby encouraging safer driving. Opponents, however, express concern that limiting the years an insurer can impose surcharges might undermine the punitive aspect of driving under the influence laws and could potentially limit the financial repercussions for chronic offenders.